2003
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-24599-5_32
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Default Knowledge in Logic Programs with Uncertainty

Abstract: Abstract. Many frameworks have been proposed to manage uncertain information in logic programming. Essentially, they differ in the underlying notion of uncertainty and how these uncertainty values, associated to rules and facts, are managed. The goal of this paper is to allow the reasoning with non-uniform default assumptions, i.e. with any arbitrary assignment of default values to the atoms. Informally, rather than to rely on the same default certainty value for all atoms, we allow arbitrary assignments to co… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

4
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For us, it seems difficult to develop a formalism in which the semantics of weights is not established a priori as in our work where weights are clearly interpreted in the framework of possibility theory. In [1,6,12,13,17,29] the reader can find different propositions about multivalued or probabilistic logic programs, about possibilistic definite logic programs, about levels of certainty ranking atoms (but not rules) involved in a non-monotonic reasoning,. .…”
Section: Dealing With Default Reasoning and Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For us, it seems difficult to develop a formalism in which the semantics of weights is not established a priori as in our work where weights are clearly interpreted in the framework of possibility theory. In [1,6,12,13,17,29] the reader can find different propositions about multivalued or probabilistic logic programs, about possibilistic definite logic programs, about levels of certainty ranking atoms (but not rules) involved in a non-monotonic reasoning,. .…”
Section: Dealing With Default Reasoning and Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[35,122,130,252,276]. On the other hand, there are very few works dealing with normal logic programs [38,78,80,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,173,186,250,253,258,263], and little is know about top-down query answering procedures. The only exceptions are [250,258,263].…”
Section: If a Nodementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other probabilistic approaches like p-programs [19,18] and normal-parametric programs [20] require a similar technique: in the <Implies> element we use @kind to associate the propagation function with the implication symbol or the probabilistic combination function used; the disjunction combination mode is specified in the @kind attribute in the atom element child of <head>; the conjunction mode is present in the <And> element in the body of the rule.…”
Section: Example 2 Consider the Following F-swrl Rulementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This extends classical logic, and minimum is the less conservative t-norm. However, the distinction between strong and naf negation in this framework is not immediate (see for instance [37]) and might require more complex truth-value lattices, namely bilattices [1,20]. The full semantics of the default language will be described in a forthcoming paper.…”
Section: Default Interpretation Of Connectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%